OUAT vs. Other Fairy Tales: Compare & Contrast

[Shanna Marie]

11 minutes ago, CCTC said:

I don't think they were overly popular as a romantic couple (and I would have been fine with them remaining just friends), but I thought Cordy and Angel were much more believable.  

I hated it when they started heading in that direction on the spinoff. Not that their personalities wouldn't have worked, but Cordy was such a pragmatist and was so blunt about the possibilities about what might happen to Angel if he got too happy, and so sure about herself that she'd know she could make him that happy, that I couldn't imagine her ever being willing to go remotely near there. It seemed to me like she would have snuffed out the very first spark of those feelings that might have developed and then happily gone on being friends. The best thing about their relationship was that she had no illusions about him and was so blunt about it that it was hard to imagine her ever swooning over him.

I think there are some characters who just shouldn't be put into a romantic relationship, and Angel was one of them. Regina might be another.

[CCTC]

2 minutes ago, Shanna Marie said:

I think there are some characters who just shouldn't be put into a romantic relationship

I blame Sam and Diane and Moonlighting for this, but I think too many shows in general feel like they need to have a romantic or a will they or won't they couple, when it either is not needed for the show or is actually detrimental and comes off forced and unbelievable.

[Camera One]

I just finished reading the first Mary Poppins book, and even if she wasn't Rumple's mother or a villain as we have joked about/discussed, she would still have been an interesting character.  (Book spoilers below).

In the book (and the movie, I think?), she seemed to be able to create portals, by drawing a door with chalk (to exit paintings).  In the book, she was able to talk to animals and she could understand the language of the wind.  There was a chapter where they said all babies could understand animals and the wind, and this ability is eventually lost, but Mary Poppins was an exception.  They could have had Mary Poppins and Pocahontas who could understand the language of/the colors of the wind.  Mary Poppins could also have taught Snow how to communicate with birds.  We never did get an origin story for that.  Snow's ability to talk to animals should be one of her specialized, so the character is not as useless.  I'm still mad they didn't use her when Emma was looking for the Red Bird in the 4A premiere (I know, I know, Regina needs a friend).

Edited December 30, 2016 by Camera One

[KingOfHearts]

Quote

I'm still mad they didn't use her when Emma was looking for the Red Bird in the 4A premiere (I know, I know, Regina needs a friend).

It would have been funny to see a bunch of characters we'd probably never see on the show as background characters from the Land of Untold Stories. You would see Mary Poppins having tea with Burt, or Mowgli getting stares from people while riding a bear.

I like to think we saw human Lady and the Tramp in 4x04 at the Italian restaurant.

Edited December 30, 2016 by KingOfHearts

[InsertWordHere]

Xander's is the face I picture whenever the Nice Guy™ is brought up. He gets way too opinionated about Buffy's love life which is really none of his business. It only gets worse in later seasons and he never really learns. Which is a shame because I thought Seasons 3-4 Xander in particular was very good looking but then he would just do something that would make me remember why I dislike him. In fact, I actually found Xander more attractive than Angel, Spike, or any of the male cast members (except maybe Giles) and he was often the funniest character in the show. I mention this because back in the fandom days the sentiment that some fans didn't like Xander because he was just the normal non-sexy guy and they were just blinded by the attractiveness of Angel or Spike (who also had the snarkiness going for him) was always brought up and it used to infuriate me. 15 years later and I'm still infuriated about it, which is probably why I hate when it comes up when discussing OUaT characters, so I am glad to find others who were as annoyed by his self-righteousness as I was. 

58 minutes ago, Camera One said:

I just finished reading the first Mary Poppins book, and even if she wasn't Rumple's father

That really would be a twist! ;)

[Camera One]

LOL, I caught that later... chalk it up to my cold.  

[YaddaYadda]

Elsa's journey from evil snow queen to the character we now know.

[Camera One]

Interesting.  Thanks for posting that.

It took them so long to adapt the original story because it wasn't relatable.. so eventually, they pretty much ditched the entire original story.  Good solution?

"When Saturn is aligned with..."?  LOL!

I had to laugh when they were explaining how The Snow Queen was just misunderstood, and also deciding not to bother defining the rules of Elsa's magic, and how trying to explain the origins of the magic just led to more questions.

Edited December 30, 2016 by Camera One

[YaddaYadda]

I'm personally over this whole "let's make the bad guy relatable". A bad guy is a bad guy, but let's give them a terrible backstory to justify why they are like that.

[Shanna Marie]

1 hour ago, YaddaYadda said:

I'm personally over this whole "let's make the bad guy relatable". A bad guy is a bad guy, but let's give them a terrible backstory to justify why they are like that.

I'd much prefer them to make heroes relatable. Let the bad guys just be bad guys, but if you can find something to identify with in the heroes, then maybe you'll have something to shoot for, you can realize that you, too, can be a hero. Besides, when you look at the real-life bad guys, they aren't very relatable. There's not some sad episode in their lives that totally explains why they went on to commit genocide. It seems more common for the really good people to come from the sad, difficult backgrounds. That gives them compassion and empathy and shows them that there are things worth fighting for.

[Camera One]

It would be fun to be A&E.  I just watched the "Bella Notte" clip from "Lady and the Tramp" came up with a possible plot point:  The last magical meatball.

[KingOfHearts]

5 minutes ago, Camera One said:

It would be fun to be A&E.  I just watched the "Bella Notte" clip from "Lady and the Tramp" came up with a possible plot point:  The last magical meatball.

Lady and the Tramp created the Spaghetti String of True Love when they kissed.

By the way, Siamese Cats for S10 Big Bads. They can be trained assassins out to kill Mulan after making a deal with Aunt Sarah, a former crime boss colleague of Bo Peep.

Edited January 3, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

23 minutes ago, KingOfHearts said:

Lady and the Tramp created the Spaghetti String of True Love when they kissed.

The original "Follow The Strand".

[KingOfHearts]

I'm a third through S3 of Buffy, and taking a break from the series. It's been a nice hiatus filler for me.

My favorite episode so far would have to be the S2 two-part finale, which did an extraordinary job at executing an emotional roller coaster. A crap ton of plot happened, so much that it reminded me for the Once S1 finale. There was just a lot of satisfaction through the episode, from Buffy teaming up with Spike, to Buffy's mom finding out her daughter is a vampire slayer. It was just full of payoff on all accounts.

Overall, Buffy is a nice comparison piece to Once, not only due to the blatant plagiarism from the latter, but the common format and setting. It's just a very similar show, much closer than Lost. Granted, it doesn't do everything better than Once. I tend to prefer the bigger stories and more of the higher-budget cinematic style that Once provides. Sometimes I relate more to full grown adults than teenagers.

I can't tell you how much I LOVED seeing Buffy's mom and Spike just sitting awkwardly in the living room. Can we get more moments like that on Once? Please? It's just begging for stuff like that. Emma/Milah was pretty close.

Edited January 5, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Dianthus]

@KingOfHearts: there will be more scenes between Spike and Joyce. They are among some of my favorite scenes from the entire series. Lovers Walk is one of my favorite episodes, and it features some delightful Spike/Joyce interaction.

I was actually on board with Bangel (B/A) while it was a thing, but I got over it. Spuffy (B/S) was/is a huge thing for me, and very much a precursor for CS. It's not a 1:1 correlation, but closer IMO.

[icewolf]

Anyone here going to watch or have watched NBC's Emerald City?

Looks like NBC is hoping this show will be its Grimm replacement in terms of Friday fantasy show.

[KingOfHearts]

So. Emerald City.

It's not the most terrible thing ever, but it's bad. I'm not going to deny that. It's painfully slow, the style is quite literally dull, and none of the characters are remotely memorable. It tries very hard to mimic Game of Thrones. (Which I have not seen, but those who have thought the same.) There's a desperate desire to be dark and gritty, but for the most part, it's unnecessary. The fantasy tropes are there, they're just buried under talking head scenes. I just wanted it to embrace them, because it could be a very epic saga. Alas, way too much time is spent on staring at bland backgrounds and listening to vague exposition.

One of the biggest problems is the lack of story. There's practically none and the narrative is skimpy. Dorothy doesn't react all that much to Oz, her backstory is pretty stock, and her quest to find the Wizard is not very urgent. Her motivation is supposed to be getting home, but she doesn't really seem to care much. Other than that, there's a lot of political drama surrounding the Wizard and the witches. There's no good versus evil, but rather just a broad struggle for power. It's amazing how many scenes you can have of the characters trying to explain how the world works without actually making anything clear. The other subplot is about Tip, who was supposed to be the token LGBT character. His transformation into a girl is not really a gender identity thing, but more magical like the book. (I was surprised considering the marketing made a big deal out of them being transgender.)

None of the actors are energetic or passionate in their roles. They're all very cold, quiet, and show little emotion. Though this Oz is very morbid and oppressive, they don't seem all that upset. They have a very robotic essence around them. The witches get some interesting costumes and designs, but their personalities don't fit them. It's not like Once, where Zelena struts around with her evil cleavage and snark. East is barely in it, as you can imagine. West is just a generic let-me-lick-you nutball. North is Glinda, who appears as pure as you may expect, but turns out to be really shady. The Wizard is presented like a dictator, al a President Snow from the Hunger Games. He's nothing to write home about. All the characters speak like there's this huge backstory the audience should be clued in on, but we never actually see anything happen.

How does it function as an Oz adaptation? It doesn't. You could stick it in any universe and make minor changes. There's no reason for this to use the Wizard of Oz books as a jumping off point. In the first half, there's gentle reminders to make sure you remember it's Oz. In the second half, it pretty much leaves that all behind and just does its own thing. I understand they were trying to go for a darker, grittier version, but there's no reason to. It's all very contrived. It's obvious they had to twist things into pretzels to match up with what the audience knows. For example, the dog gets the name Toto because that happens to be the word for "dog" in the Munchkin language. Why force iconography you don't want to embrace into something that has nothing to do with it? It's hard to judge this as an Oz adaptation when it's so far from it.

Once Upon a Time is so much better. Everyone on this board should be counting their blessings. I know we love to complain about the ADD-style writing, but S1 was considered "slow" and it kept a much livelier pace than Emerald City. Once fixes many of Emerald City's problems - it has likeable characters, colorful visuals, great actors, and exciting stories. Emerald City is just worse in every way. Maybe I just have a short attention span, but I would take Once's Saturday morning cartoons over what I saw tonight any day.

In short, it's boring, dull, and does not need to exist. It does not bring anything new to the table. You can't just smash Wizard of Oz and Game of Thrones together and expect it to work. You need a good story. God bless A&E.

Edited January 7, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[CCTC]

The above review of Emerald City is spot on.  I don't mind things moving at a slower pace as much as it was so bleak and you did not care about anyone.  I  thought the actress playing Dorothy was decent or has the potential to be decent, but when everyone else seems like they have been downloaded from a video game - that is not enough.   I made it through a little past the hour mark, and decided to move on.  It did remind me I have been meaning to read the original series.  I read Wonderful Wizard of Oz as a kid and have always meant to check out the other books (and the sequels to Wrinkle in Time which I did not know existed - but that is another story).

[Shanna Marie]

I liked some of the imagery in Emerald City, and they turned Toto into a German Shepherd police dog, so I'm in for the time being, but my main problem is that I have no idea what the story is supposed to be about. I figure Dorothy wants to find the wizard to get home, since that's the Oz story, but I get the feeling there's something else going on, and I'm afraid they've got the same "surprise!" bug as the writers on OUAT, where they'll keep us in the dark for several episodes so they can surprise us with the big revelation, but that means we don't know what the story really is. I'm guessing Dorothy is the daughter of the missing South, so getting "home" means staying in Oz, and heading to the Wizard means heading into trouble because he seems to be anti-witch, but I pieced all that together because I'm familiar with tropes, not because there's any narrative drive in the story.

But I did like what they did with the "scarecrow" and there is that dog (I love German shepherds), so I'll give it at least another week.

Oh, and if that's not supposed to be a magic tornado, whoever wrote this has never been around a tornado. Tornadoes don't sneak up on you. They're very loud. And if a person you can see gets sucked up into a tornado, you're already pretty much a goner because the winds spread out. And being in a car is even worse than being in a trailer.

[KingOfHearts]

Why were people out with a tornado on the prowl, anyway? Just dumb.

The funeral ceremony with the convulsions and vomiting spells was just WTF.

Mombi reminded me of the old lady in The Happening. "What? No!" The hammy performance was kind of funny.

[Senna]

 I felt very differently about Emerald City. I was expecting it to be stupid (gritty Oz? Come on!), but it held my full attention for the whole two hours, and I thought the visuals were gorgeous. (I will admit, how much I looooved the visuals may have caused me to overlook other weaknesses. It was just so so pretty.)  Yeah, a lot of things aren't clear yet, but to me it felt like getting a glimpse of an interesting new world. I was sucked into the show, and I will definitely be tuning in next week. But it seems like it might be a love it or hate it show, so different strokes for different folks :) 

By the way, for what it is worth, I can see where people are getting the GoT comparisons (violence, sexual content, politics), but the shows felt very different to me. Emerald City felt sort of whimsically dark, while GoT is firmly not whimsical.

[Souris]

The GoT comparisons were what made me not want to watch. It's still on my DVR, but I don't know if I'll watch or just delete.

[KingOfHearts]

Even though Emerald City is far from an actual adaptation of the Oz books, the elements it does take from them do translate well. I found it kind of hilarious when Dorothy ran the witch over with a police car. That was clever modernization. There's reminiscence to Once with the concept of borrowing aspects of a well-known work and playing with your expectations for the story. For instance, one would assume the Munchkins would receive Dorothy well, but they just wanted to get rid of her. Also, due to the MGM film, you would expect Oz to be colorful in contrast with Kansas. In EC, it's almost the opposite. Oz is not a "better" place, but another universe with its own reality and problems. Dorothy went out of the frying pan and into the fire, so to speak.

I like it a little more in retrospect. It presents some neat ideas and I'm curious to see how it plays out. There's obviously a lot of information being withheld from the audience, which could make or break the show. If there's mystery in Once, it's usually executed in a condescending way with contrived twists. But, if EC makes you think, "Oh, that explains it!" then that would be refreshing. I'm hoping it's one of the shows that presents a slow start but picks up as it goes along. Once, by contrast, started with a bang, slowed down for a while, then came back.

[Camera One]

Quote

It tries very hard to mimic Game of Thrones. (Which I have not seen, but those who have thought the same.) There's a desperate desire to be dark and gritty

That's exactly the sense I got as well.  The world was so thoroughly depressing and bleak that it just wasn't all that fun to watch.  I think there was just a single exchange of lines in 2 whole hours which showed the heroine (and the writers) having any hint of a sense of humor.

Having said that, I do think the main actress has the potential to be likeable.  I didn't really mind the lack of a plot since the gist of the adventure was pretty simple... Dorothy wanted to get home and she wanted to help her injured friend.  I liked that she had a skill of nursing.  

Quote

here's no good versus evil, but rather just a broad struggle for power. It's amazing how many scenes you can have of the characters trying to explain how the world works without actually making anything clear.

Yeah, in the Emerald City subplot, there were a lot of lines hinting at stuff but not defining anything, and it was very political like we were watching Witch Trials of the Middle Ages mixed with "The Tudors".  Unfortunately, the Wizard was abrasive, the Witch of West was a mess in an unlikeable way and Glinda was cold as ice and unlikeable as well.  It's hard to enjoy a show with so many unlikeable people.  

I did think it was clever how they incorporated some elements of Oz, from the opium petals making the road yellow, to actually including characters from the books like Mombi and Tip with a friend named Jack (though there was a really abrupt cut between Dorothy kicking open Tip's door and Jack suddenly appearing after the commercial break).  Having Dorothy's car hit the Witch was a nice touch too.  I'm glad there was an Aunt and Uncle, and they changed the Scarecrow's name from Henry to Lucas.  The Tribal Munchkins and the Knights who were trying to track and kill Dorothy strayed too far, though.

The cinematography and the sweeping landscapes were a plus, I think.  But again, it was lacking the "magic" and whimsy of Oz... more like drab Medieval drama.  I could imagine King Henry VIII walking up at any moment.

I didn't hate it and I didn't love it, but it will definitely be no replacement for "Once" because I have no desire to discuss it further.

Edited January 8, 2017 by Camera One

[Shanna Marie]

One thing I did like about Emerald City as compared to "Once" is that sense of it being a real world. To some extent, the CGI stuff is part of the design of "Once," since it makes it look a little unreal and fairy tale like, but at the same time, when they get out of the studio and have the occasional sweeping landscape, it can be very effective. There have been some beautiful shots, like the helicopter shots of people on horseback that they tend to use to start seasons, or the shot of the Jolly Roger at sea from "The Crocodile." 

I also got the sense that even if they aren't telling us, the Emerald City writers know exactly what's going on. I'm fairly certain they know the Wizard's history with the witches, what happened in the backstory, how each of the cardinal witches works and what her rules are, how their magic works, etc. It's become pretty clear that the "Once" writers didn't know this kind of stuff during their pilot. Some of it, they still don't know.

[Souris]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

That's exactly the sense I got as well.  The world was so thoroughly depressing and bleak that it just wasn't all that fun to watch.  I think there was just a single exchange of lines in 2 whole hours which showed the heroine (and the writers) having any hint of a sense of humor.

Well, that's a death knell for me! 

[Camera One]

I was watching an interview and it does look like they did read all the books, so at least there was some effort to utilize the source material (*cough* The Count of Monte Cristo).  It does seem like they have put some thought into (metaphorically) representing some of these characters.  Whether they are successful is another story, but it will be interesting to see some of the characters that have never been adapted appear onscreen.

http://ew.com/tv/2017/01/07/emerald-city-eps-on-series-debut/

I didn't realize they filmed in three European countries.  That's why it looked so cinematic, I suppose.  The yellow brick road was a 2000 year old Roman road.

Edited January 8, 2017 by Camera One

[daxx]

It's gorgeous, I'm going to give it another go just because of the visuals.

[tennisgurl]

Honestly, I really enjoyed Emerald City, even though it obviously has some kinks to work out. As everyone else has said, its gorgeous to look at, both with the scenery and the architecture and the costumes. I know some people have compared it to Game of Thrones, and I get that, but this is WAY more weird and whimsical than GoT ever got, and I really enjoy that. GoT is fantasy, but, especially in its first season, its all very down to earth, and seems more like a historical piece than a fantasy world, in costuming and locations especially. Like, I dont ever see anyone from GoT employing a steampunk flying monkey drone any time soon. It seems like it has the capacity to embrace the whimsy of Oz, even if its filtered through a darker lens. To me, Once is much worse at not embracing the whimsy of a magic world. It seems like every world they go to is just another freaking forest, and its denizens are just wearing slightly different peasant clothes. Once is the show where creativity goes to die (at least the last few seasons), and all interesting ideas or worlds are pushed on the back burner to push the writers pet characters to the foreground.  

12 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

I also got the sense that even if they aren't telling us, the Emerald City writers know exactly what's going on.

I totally agree. I do not totally know whats going on, but I feel like the writers do, which is more than what I feel about Once, where the writers just seem to have a dart board full of random ideas they throw darts at. I feel like there is a point to this show, and the writers understand the world and the backstory and where they want the storyline to go, at least for awhile. One of the biggest issues with Once is the lack of backstory and world building, where the writers have no idea what the world is supposed to be or what the rules are. It took us like four seasons just to learn the actual name of the Enchanted Forests country! At least this show seems to have committed to the world. 

As to it being too dark and depressing? I didn't think it was too bad in that regard. Its dark, and the tribal waterboarding munchkins was probably the stupidest "edgy"element to me, but the depressing was, to me, helped by the fact that Dorothy is a really likable character, who seems like a good person with a strong moral compass, without being boring or annoyingly perfect or sainted. It was a bit humorless, but it was a pilot. They had a lot of world to build and exposition to throw out, so I will give them some time to create some more lightness and whimsy. At least this isn't HBO where Dorothy would have three attempted rapes by this point, or even Once where they keep accidentally writing rape scenes and horrific tragedies for the characters, but they write them accidentally, and never follow up on them! 

[Writing Wrongs]

Dorothy making a wish and blowing out the candle reminded me of Emma's scene in the pilot.

The guy as a scarecrow saying "Help me" reminded me of Clark in the Smallville pilot.

[Camera One]

6 minutes ago, Writing Wrongs said:

Dorothy making a wish and blowing out the candle reminded me of Emma's scene in the pilot.

Me too!

I was surprised Dorothy was a pleasant person after seeing the most recent Dorothy in "Ruby Slippers".

[Shanna Marie]

I think my main worry about Emerald City is that there aren't a lot of characters to cheer for. There's Dorothy and Toto, of course, and it looks like Jack and Tip are good guys, but they spend a lot of time around the Wizard and the witches, and I can't tell who I'm supposed to be rooting for there. Is the Wizard right to have restricted the witches? Are the witches the good guys? They're all entertaining to watch, but it seems like an entire plot line where I don't actually like any of the characters. I guess that's the part that reminds me of Game of Thrones. It's like the King's Landing scenes, where I pretty much hate all of them.

Lucas is kind of a question mark as to whether we'll want to cheer for him, depending on his backstory and how he actually develops. However, he is probably the part I find most interesting, and not just because of the hot factor. The concept of "who would you be if you didn't know who you were?" is one of my favorite character tropes -- strip away the baggage and the history, and what kind of person are you, what decisions do you make? So a hot, badass amnesiac surrounded by people who have no clue who he is and no expectations is basically catnip for me.

You know, as often as they do memory wipes on OUAT, they've never really managed to do the "who would you be if you didn't know who you were" story, since they usually have fake identities as part of the memory wipes. The closest was probably David when he came out of the coma but before he got fake memories, but that was all about him being drawn to Snow. They never really got into that idea of who Belle might be when her memory was wiped. Otherwise, I guess they verged on this with Hook in the AU, where he overcame his programming to be courageous, or when he managed to be good in spite of being the Dark One when he had no memory of being the Dark One (which still makes no sense, since it's a separate entity that would have made its presence felt). It would be interesting to make Regina a blank slate -- wipe her memories and send her someplace where no one knows who she is. Without the memories of her upbringing by Cora and all the times she's felt like a victim, without Daniel's death and being the Evil Queen, who would she be? Would that envy gene that seems to run in her family come out anyway? Would she still make bad decisions? Or would she be a good person without all that baggage? Or what would Hook be like without all his baggage, the memory of being abandoned, of losing his brother, losing Milah, devoting himself to revenge? Or Rumple with a clean slate?

[Camera One]

They seemed to stress "The Beast Forever", to the point that it's the title of the first episode, but I don't get it and I'm not intrigued by it at all.  In a show that I immediately latch to, I should be intrigued by almost everything in the pilot.  I'm a bit more interested in the Scarecrow's history, but not hugely... it reminded me of the Tin Man's backstory in the "Tin Man" miniseries (a lot of this show is reminiscent of that miniseries).  I'm usually interested in Witches, but I found myself not really that curious because of how unlikeable Glinda and the Witch of the West and East were.   There isn't much mystery about Dorothy beyond her mother, and I didn't really find out enough to be too invested in that either.  Another important consideration with a new pilot is how much there is to look forward to, and in this show, my answer would be "not much".  It's obvious that when Dorothy gets to the Emerald City, she's going to be manipulated or tricked or tortured or attacked by The Wizard and/or The Witches.  So I'm more interested in the journey than in her getting there to interact with the Trifecta of Scenery Chewing, who seemed to be in every "promo" during the first 2 hours, which was really confusing because most of the teasers were from future episodes.

In contrast, in the pilot of "Once", I was intrigued by the town of Storybrooke... how it worked, who lives there, how Emma would break the Curse, how Snow became the target of The Evil Queen, how Snow became friends with Granny, Red, Jiminy, Gepetto and Blue.  Yes, they never really explained how Storybrooke worked in a satisfying way and half of the original supporting characters are used as extras, but I was definitely intrigued.  There were so many things to look forward to - Emma believing, Snow and the others remembering, Emma and Henry getting to know one another, Emma messing up The Evil Queen's plans, seeing more of Snow and Charming's backstory... you could imagine the payoff you were going to get (not that we ever got it, but still...).

So while "Emerald City" was decent, it's pretty easy to tell it won't become one of those all-consuming shows for me (which disturbingly, "Once Upon a Time" is).

Edited January 8, 2017 by Camera One

[tennisgurl]

Cruising around social media, it seems like Emerald City has gotten a lot of attention from Once fans, especially ones who have become disenchanted by the last few seasons of Once. I can certainly see the similarities, especially in the pilot. Once also had a young woman with family issues (although at last Dorothy seemed to have good relations with her aunt and uncle) who feels aimless in life suddenly being whisked away into a magical place that she seems to have a mysterious magical connection to through her mysterious family, where she suddenly is thrown into the backstory and politics of a magic world she does not understand (although Storybrooke is a weird magical realism town, not a full on magical land), while having sexual tension with a hot guy with memory problems. I get it. Of course, I actually thought the Once pilot was amazing, while this was just good, with flaws and potential. But than, things have changed a lot (for the worst) since the pilot episode, so who knows how this will go. 

2 hours ago, Shanna Marie said:

and I can't tell who I'm supposed to be rooting for there. Is the Wizard right to have restricted the witches? Are the witches the good guys?

I actually like this element, because I feel like there are a lot of shades of grey here, at least in the backstory. I am leaning towards the wizard being the Bad Guy and the witches being morally grey, leaning towards good, but I cant be sure right now. Banning magic sounds bad, but maybe he had a reason to ban magic? Maybe underneath the ham they all have good motives for what they've done and how they act? Right now, we haven't really seen a scene where they do anything SUPER evil (except creating the magic user prison), so maybe they're going somewhere interesting with them? Maybe they all suck, and Dorothy and any good guys she has picked up will have to defeat them all, of they'll do a GoT thing where all the bad guys take each other out? I dont really mind having multiple bad guys, as long as they give time to the good guys as well, or if they do have bad guys, they dont downplay their evil, and have them either get what they have coming, or learn a lesson and get redeemed after much hard work. Where Once struggles is when the writers get so obsessed with writing the villains, they ignore the heroes, try to justify the villains awful actions, or make them too good or too evil to be real characters. I dont mind villains, I just want them done well, without having them take over. 

Edited January 9, 2017 by tennisgurl

[maryle]

Yes, I see a lot of CS fans on Tumblr love it. I will probably see it today. 

Actually, I am happy that seem a 10 limited episode series I know the story will have a conclusion good or bad.  

[Camera One]

So this week's episode of "Emerald City" had a steampunk city for no apparent reason.  They called it "Ev", which was pretty much a name-drop from the books, nothing more.  

[KingOfHearts]

31 minutes ago, Camera One said:

So this week's episode of "Emerald City" had a steampunk city for no apparent reason.  They called it "Ev", which was pretty much a name-drop from the books, nothing more. 

Still more fleshed out than the Land of Untold Stories...

[Camera One]

I hope it will be, but right now, they have told us little about Ev.  They should be fleshing it out more in its first episode.  How was Ev related to Emerald City?  Why did Jack take Tip there?  Was Jack from there?  I'm not sure what that place with a balcony was at the end.  How did Jack find Tip there?  

[KingOfHearts]

Finally got to watching Alice Through the Looking Glass, now that it's on Netflix. I don't know what it is about fantasy, but a lot of adaptations of classic, whimsical works really suck. The first movie (Alice in Wonderland) was negatively received, but I thought the tone and visuals were in line with the spirit of the book while also making it more cinematic. The writing wasn't very good, but it was more for eye candy.

The sequel, while it does retain most of the stunning CGI, has an even weaker story. It also incorporates more mundane situations and people, which makes it much more generic. The core conflict lacks scale (the Hatter is sick, who cares?), making the movie's scope much smaller. The secondary conflict has to do with time stopping and everyone perishing, which is much more important, but the urgency only concerns one character for the most part. (Time.) Everything that happens is way too standard for a setting all about nonsense. It's mainly a time travel plot where the hero has to go back and change/fix an event. That's sitting on top of a subplot that woobifies the Red Queen much like with Regina on Once Upon a Time. 

I thought Time was an interesting character to introduce, because he's essentially a living allegory. Other than that, it's just horrible. It only steals wordplay and icons from the book, in very A&E style. Disney's been pretty hit or miss with their live action remakes. On one hand, you could have Cinderella, but on the other, something stupid like Maleficent.

Edited January 15, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[KingOfHearts]

Does anyone here find Once Upon a Time to be rather unique compared to other TV shows? There's shows like Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Lost that follow a similar format (and sometimes the same story beats), but they don't strike the same tone. That's not to say OUAT is better in any way, shape or form, but it doesn't seem like your run-of-the-mill show. I believe it has a lot to do with the Disney iconography and the sheer ridiculousness the writers get away with.

[Camera One]

That's probably why we're addicted to it and suffering from withdrawal despite 6A.

[KingOfHearts]

Emerald City is starting to pick up a bit after a slow-ish start. It's not the characters that are intriguing, but rather the dynamics between them and the world they live in. Once Upon a Time focuses on making characters memorable, but Emerald City is much more about worldbuilding and seeing how the characters react to different developments. For instance, Dorothy doesn't seem to give two figs that she's been taken to a magical realm. She adjusts pretty quickly. She doesn't have a huge tragic backstory, and it's not really about her emotions. That doesn't sound too interesting on paper, but it's refreshing. There's more time dedicated to her being a badass with a gun. She falls more in line with the contemporary audience - we're not as amazed by fantasy as we used to be, but we can still be humored by the unique scenarios it brings to the table.

EC is way better than Tin Man, so far. I would say it's better than current OUAT, but not as good as OUAT in the earlier seasons. I'm not used to the amount of effort the writers put in to make their world colorful and rich. (As well as the incorporation of so many details from the source material, including the lesser known ones.)

Blue ain't got nothing on Glinda in the shadiness department.

Edited January 21, 2017 by KingOfHearts

[Camera One]

The Flash/Supergirl shows on CW are getting a musical episode.  "Once" has a cast that can sing, and can use any Disney song they want, yet there hasn't been a murmur of this.  Why can't this show actually have some fun with what it has?

Edited January 22, 2017 by Camera One

[Souris]

1 hour ago, Camera One said:

The Flash/Supergirl shows on CW are getting a musical episode.  "Once" has a cast that can sing, and can use any Disney song they want, yet there hasn't been a murmur of this.  Why can't this show actually have some fun with what it has?

Because A&E aren't talented or creative enough to make it happen.

[Camera One]

I think it's more lack of will or interest.  It doesn't even need a plot.  They could have done it in the 6A finale.  Emma could have been sent to a Singing Wish Realm, and Regina goes to save her - all it takes is one touch.  But Regina can never get close to Emma because of the singing characters prancing into the scene and the crowd dancing so Emma is always too far away.  Ginny and Josh could sing "I'm Wishing/One Song", Colin could sing something from "Peter Pan", etc.  Then, at the end of the episode, Regina finally reaches Emma, and they are about to go through the portal when Alt Robin Hood shows up.  Same ending.

[Camera One]

Quote

Emerald City is starting to pick up a bit after a slow-ish start. It's not the characters that are intriguing, but rather the dynamics between them and the world they live in. Once Upon a Time focuses on making characters memorable, but Emerald City is much more about worldbuilding and seeing how the characters react to different developments. For instance, Dorothy doesn't seem to give two figs that she's been taken to a magical realm. She adjusts pretty quickly. She doesn't have a huge tragic backstory, and it's not really about her emotions. That doesn't sound too interesting on paper, but it's refreshing. There's more time dedicated to her being a badass with a gun. She falls more in line with the contemporary audience - we're not as amazed by fantasy as we used to be, but we can still be humored by the unique scenarios it brings to the table.

EC is way better than Tin Man, so far. I would say it's better than current OUAT, but not as good as OUAT in the earlier seasons. I'm not used to the amount of effort the writers put in to make their world colorful and rich. (As well as the incorporation of so many details from the source material, including the lesser known ones.)

To me, the show is consistent, but it hasn't gotten any better or worse.  I don't find it includes too much from the books, just a smattering of Easter Eggs with a lot of in-name-only's.  

Dorothy as the modern-day insert is mostly like Emma from Season 1, but not as charismatic or witty.  I still find that "Emerald City" takes itself way too seriously.  And it is still mostly a tease.  The entire episode is just dancing around the actual motives of Glinda, West, the Wizard, Wizard's Huntsman, Anna, Lady Ev, etc.

This show is very different from "Tin Man", which was extremely cartoonish, so I can't say one is better than the other.  To me, both are mostly meh.

"Emerald City" is certainly beautifully filmed.

I did have to laugh when Dorothy went all Henry in this episode, and impressed Lucas with the ear buds and sharing her favorite song.  The Science vs. Magic stuff also reminded me a little of 2B.

Edited January 22, 2017 by Camera One

[tennisgurl]

What I am really enjoying about Emerald City is how much thought and detail has been put into the magical world we find our self in, and the differences in cities and towns. This week, we spent a lot of time in a Steampunk city with lots of clockwork details, rail cars, electricity, and even a mad scientist, in contrast with more of the medieval style magic world we have seen in other places. One of my biggest complaints about Once is the lack of creativity in world building, and how almost every world they visit seems to either look like just another medieval forest, or we hardly get to see any of it, so its nice to see the effort being put into creating an interesting magical land.

I would say its not as good as Once at its best, but its certainly better than current Once.

Edited January 22, 2017 by tennisgurl

[legaleagle53]

21 hours ago, Camera One said:

The Flash/Supergirl shows on CW are getting a musical episode.  "Once" has a cast that can sing, and can use any Disney song they want, yet there hasn't been a murmur of this.  Why can't this show actually have some fun with what it has?

 

Spoiler

Be careful what you wish for.

[Shanna Marie]

I've started rewatching Wonderland online, and now I really wish they'd release it on DVD. It's a nice mood lifter because there's something rather joyous about it. It's everything I wish the original series could be. There's actual worldbuilding, in that Wonderland feels like a developed place with an actual society that has distinct differences from our world. They do a good job of blending CGI with real locations and adding props to the real locations to make it look magical and alien. The cheesy CGI even works to add to that sense of unreality. There's a sense of humor and whimsy, like the Clothes Horse or getting across the lake via fairy (a joke that works better out loud than in print). Alice is a very proactive heroine who has a goal and a plan but who has to keep improvising with her plan when her opponents counter her. There's no just running around and playing whack-a-mole with the villains. The villains are going after what they want, Alice is going after what she wants, and the conflict comes when their goals are mutually exclusive. It's all fun and romantic, both the flashbacks of Alice and Cyrus together and their efforts to be together in the present. He may be in the role of Damsel in Distress, but he's also working to do what he can. They also do a much better job of showing hope than the original does. For instance, in the second episode, Alice fails. She doesn't reach the bottle, and we know that the Red Queen having it could be bad for Cyrus. But at the end of the episode, we see Alice getting the message from Cyrus and having her hope restored, and the episode ends with the image of her sending her response winging back to him, so you're left with an uplifting, hopeful feeling that works as well as a cliffhanger, since it made me want to watch the next episode right away. The way they're writing the mother show now, they'd have ended with Alice staring at the hole where the bottle was and feeling despondent because everything had failed.

[Camera One]

It turned out for the best they only had one season, though.  I doubt they would have been able to do a good second season.  Repetition, character assassination and contradiction of their rules would start settling in (if not already).  Even though Alice had small victories at the start, I still found it frustrating to watch Jafar often having the upper hand, while unconvinced that he wouldn't have the upper hand while he waited for stuff to happen.  I'm not sure certain twist revealed in the second half of the season (which was much, much better) made sense from what we saw in the first half, especially in regards to Cyrus' mother.  

I wish they didn't blow off so many Disney and fairy tale characters in the parent show, since there could have been quite a few who could have had some excellent one-off seasons (eg. Maleficent/Aurora/Philip/King Stefan, for one... oh no, I guess I should be slapped for not including Lily).